50 Comments
User's avatar
Ruben Quesada's avatar

That's wild. And I do love "its syntactic cheekbones."

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

A grammarista!

Expand full comment
Judith Weston's avatar

Count me fully panicked. And compelled to a less elegant turn of phase than our gracious overlord—Holy shit!

Expand full comment
Carla Menssen's avatar

Fuckin’ A. As my generation used to (inarticulately) say.

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

Mine regally pronounced, “King’s A.”

Expand full comment
Leslie Doyle's avatar

I mean I think it's good for people to hear that it's just fancy guessing. Too many people are being misled by the misnomer of "intelligence" rather than the truth of the actual process of stealing plus math. Adorable how it's programmed to tell us that.

Expand full comment
Kevin M. Randall's avatar

At some point, won't this go from "guessing" to actual intelligence? Did/do organic brains go through a similar process, over eons, to develop into what they are currently? I wonder if HAL 9000 is going to appear in front of us closer than we think.

Expand full comment
Marvin Waschke's avatar

Generative AI will not become actual intelligence because computers are far too simple compared to a mouse brain, or even a geranium. Computers combine zeroes and ones in simple operations like NAND and NOR logic switches. A geranium grows and responds to its environment in chemical combinations that are many orders of magnitude more varied and complex. The potted plant on your desk sitting next to your laptop is more likely to display actual intelligence than a laptop running generative AI like ChatGPT.

The real marvel is that what we mistake for intelligence and creativity is only mimicry.

Expand full comment
Leslie Doyle's avatar

Thank you! I'm appalled at how people are being missed to think there is any kind of sentience in these programs. Just, handing power to them unnecessarily.

Expand full comment
Leslie Doyle's avatar

Edit: misled not missed

Expand full comment
Marisa's avatar

Wow. Need to wrap my existent head around all this. Thanks, Sallie, for your cuteness. It helped.

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

Your existent head, Sallie’s existential stare.

Expand full comment
Sandy MacDonald's avatar

Panicking, con permiso

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

With a side of persimmon.

Expand full comment
Dawn's avatar

Holy &*%%#$. Reading that, I find it less surprising that people are starting to have AI romantic partners...

Expand full comment
docmommaVA's avatar

I was hoping that your friend was punking you and that he'd written it himself. But then I read his post and I am feeling queasy. Good advice, though. <hits "subscribe"> https://substack.com/home/post/p-165100866

Expand full comment
Katharine O'Moore-Klopf's avatar

😂

Expand full comment
Deborah's avatar

The thing I find most galling is the relationship between phrenology and cheekbones in that bit. Phrenology, discredited as it is, does have a particular definition, and cheekbones don't figure into it. I can't for the life of me remember which other type of pseudoscience in particular dealt with cheekbones and facial features, but I do know it wasn't phrenology and now I'm bothered I can't pull it to mind.

I do rather like the turn of phrase, mind you. But I'm thinking, instead, of Mr. Rochester's prominent forehead....

Expand full comment
Deborah's avatar

Oh my Lord I'm SUCH a pedant...

Expand full comment
Charles Gatlin's avatar

No, you honed in on the one obvious clue that something was wrong with the otherwise nice little piece of writing.

I think that cheekbones featured in some of the pseudoscience that tried to classify races by systematic physical descriptions as if such differences were more significant than they are.

Expand full comment
DenizB33's avatar

No! I agree with Charles! It all looks so close that non-pedants don't question it. We need to keep questioning–but does doing so help further train LLMs?

Expand full comment
Caroline Smrstik's avatar

This is what I wonder about, too. How much of what we do is training the bots?

Expand full comment
DenizB33's avatar

And what about if we try to actively refuse, by keeping our writing locked away? Then whose writing is it trained on?

Expand full comment
Caroline Smrstik's avatar

Non-pedants, I suppose.

Expand full comment
DenizB33's avatar

Darn it, then I feel unrepresented! 🤣

Expand full comment
Charles Gatlin's avatar

Is perhaps “physiognomy” the term you’re trying to remember?

Expand full comment
Deborah's avatar

Yes! I seem to remember so-called experiments in the 19th century using photographs superimposed one over the other to try to determine shared characteristics in any given race. I recall a paper I read, I think when we were doing "Pudd’nhead Wilson"... Yes, I think we're talking about exactly the same thing.

Expand full comment
Aaron's avatar

I heartily recommend you read this amazing conversation, which at first impressed me with ChatGPT's fluency... until the penny dropped. https://amandaguinzburg.substack.com/p/diabolus-ex-machina

Expand full comment
Robin's avatar

i just shared a link to that one myself!

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

“… phrenology for prose …” sure, alliteration literally; but “syntactic cheekbones” oh my! Strutting down the catwalk, ever so indifferent, superior in every way, and those gams!

Expand full comment
Ben's avatar

Klatu barada nikto!

Expand full comment
Sandra Game's avatar

O. M. G. That is hilarious and impressive. It’s like it is matching your satirical tone. Too funny.

Expand full comment
Keith Jenkins's avatar

Why must It be so charming? Will It learn to woo Us with turns of phrase?

Expand full comment
Andrew Ordover's avatar

As I wrote in an earlier post, it seems really clear that part of its programming is not simply to give us responses to queries, but also to give us something like social chatter, to engage us and make us want to use it more (it can be pretty relentless in asking if we want its further help). And I think it's also programmed to mirror your syntax and tone (unless you tell it to stop), to be "friendly..." though maybe in kind of a "Single White Female" way.

Expand full comment
Lynne Shaner's avatar

I am, I confess, astonished. Also---yikes.

Expand full comment